That's assuming all you want to do is store files. And that you don't care that they are all in the same location. And that you can store them all on a single hard drive.
Old school might be ok for you. I just hope you never manage the IT for any company I work at.
Yes. When you use the right words to describe things, it can be said that it is more "clear".
My only problem with your original statement was that you phrased it in a way that stated that both drivers shared some fault (and the only fault that matters is legal). That isn't true, I realize that you (now, perhaps) realize that, and hopefully the people of Slashdot realize that.
Enough of this distraction... Now, if someone would just address the actual points of my initial "troll" posting.:) (I'm burned out though now)
The actual fix was to just add quotes around the yellow (I just realized I missed that). If you want to drive through actual yellow lights, you can. But if it goes red before you enter the intersection, I hope that you get eaten by an alligator.
I can't disagree anymore strongly with that statement. Both drivers are not in the wrong.
A green light means I can legally go. Suggesting anything else is stupid and wrong.
But given your feelings about this maybe making sure that you aren't going to get hit by people running red lights isn't necessarily a terrible idea, since it appears that you think running through red lights is only mostly against the law.
Explain to me how this isn't entirely the "chick in the SUV"s fault?
Your friend had a green light. She had a red light. Your friend entered the intersection legally. She enters the intersection illegally. A collision ensues.
At what point in that scenario was the "chick in the SUV" in the right... at all?
I used the term "yellow" in quotes for a reason. The rest of the post is referring to people actually running red lights (and presumably claiming that the yellow wasn't long enough).
The other driver's light wasn't close to yellow. My light had been green long enough for me to be halfway through the intersection. And I wish it had been a horse instead of a Denali.
This is a strawman. We're not talking about a 6 second differences. We're talking about less than half a second.
Also, when I said "yellow" apparently you didn't catch the implication. I understand that the rest of my post was about people running red lights, and that making that connection in the one sentence with sarcasm is hard...
FIRST) From what I understand, the difference in light duration is because they changed the formula. Instead of using the speed that they assume people are traveling, they are now using the speed which is posted. It's not some arbitrary difference that some red-light camera company man came up with. (if this is not actually the case, someone prove me wrong).
SECOND) You only get a ticket if you enter the intersection AFTER the light has gone red.
Full disclosure, 4 years ago we here very nearly hit square on by someone blowing through a "yellow" light. Instead of killing both me and my wife (our sedan vs her lifted SUV), she just ran over our hood. If we had been 2 feet further into the intersection, I would most likely not be here typing this message. I have ZERO sympathy for people who try to beat red lights. The equations they use to determine the yellow light duration take stopping distance into account. The laws shouldn't be wrtitten just because you are going 10mph over the speed limit, and can't safely stop in time.
It's not so much about what you are able to do one day vs the next... it's when you get caught trying to steal third base, and are sent scrambling back to second, only to find out that it's already occupied. Thinking you're done, you head back to the couch, only to realize that first base is still open... and there you go, safe!
The mess that used both was using QT for EVERYTHING and Boost for EVERYTHING. It was amazing. Have you ever considered using both QT and Boosts signal/slot mechanisms? Did you know that both Boost and QT have shared pointer classes? Have you ever thought about using both? In the same class...
I've worked on projects that have used QT and ones that used Boost, and one giant mess that used both, and so I have to disagree on the hope that they adopt each other.
Both provide useful tools that don't need to be mixed up. Boost is (afaik) the leading edge for what the next C++ standard will contain. Boost does the crazy things, the good ones get polished and eventually become standard C++.
I love QT, but I can't imagine it becoming part of the C++ standard. So much overhead for things that you don't always need. (even by C++ standards).
Slashdot Mirror
That's assuming all you want to do is store files. And that you don't care that they are all in the same location. And that you can store them all on a single hard drive.
Old school might be ok for you. I just hope you never manage the IT for any company I work at.
As opposed to the current methods we use to produce our power.
Please tell me that people aren't writing games in Perl... for the love of all that is sacred in this world.
It's like a baron, but with more rolling of the arrrrrrrrrrs
Yes. When you use the right words to describe things, it can be said that it is more "clear".
My only problem with your original statement was that you phrased it in a way that stated that both drivers shared some fault (and the only fault that matters is legal). That isn't true, I realize that you (now, perhaps) realize that, and hopefully the people of Slashdot realize that.
Enough of this distraction... Now, if someone would just address the actual points of my initial "troll" posting. :) (I'm burned out though now)
The actual fix was to just add quotes around the yellow (I just realized I missed that). If you want to drive through actual yellow lights, you can. But if it goes red before you enter the intersection, I hope that you get eaten by an alligator.
I can't disagree anymore strongly with that statement. Both drivers are not in the wrong.
A green light means I can legally go. Suggesting anything else is stupid and wrong.
But given your feelings about this maybe making sure that you aren't going to get hit by people running red lights isn't necessarily a terrible idea, since it appears that you think running through red lights is only mostly against the law.
Technically?
Explain to me how this isn't entirely the "chick in the SUV"s fault?
Your friend had a green light. She had a red light. Your friend entered the intersection legally. She enters the intersection illegally. A collision ensues.
At what point in that scenario was the "chick in the SUV" in the right... at all?
Also... that post had sarcasm.
Sorry about that.
(this post only contains moderate amounts of sarcasm)
I used the term "yellow" in quotes for a reason. The rest of the post is referring to people actually running red lights (and presumably claiming that the yellow wasn't long enough).
The other driver's light wasn't close to yellow. My light had been green long enough for me to be halfway through the intersection. And I wish it had been a horse instead of a Denali.
This is a strawman. We're not talking about a 6 second differences. We're talking about less than half a second.
Also, when I said "yellow" apparently you didn't catch the implication. I understand that the rest of my post was about people running red lights, and that making that connection in the one sentence with sarcasm is hard...
but really, this is the internet!
What I'm saying is that people shouldn't speed, and they shouldn't run red lights.
Brave AC!
No. "Yellow" as in the light was already red, and had been green for me long enough to be halfway through the intersection.
Why does this have to be about safety.
FIRST) From what I understand, the difference in light duration is because they changed the formula. Instead of using the speed that they assume people are traveling, they are now using the speed which is posted. It's not some arbitrary difference that some red-light camera company man came up with. (if this is not actually the case, someone prove me wrong).
SECOND) You only get a ticket if you enter the intersection AFTER the light has gone red.
Full disclosure, 4 years ago we here very nearly hit square on by someone blowing through a "yellow" light. Instead of killing both me and my wife (our sedan vs her lifted SUV), she just ran over our hood. If we had been 2 feet further into the intersection, I would most likely not be here typing this message. I have ZERO sympathy for people who try to beat red lights. The equations they use to determine the yellow light duration take stopping distance into account. The laws shouldn't be wrtitten just because you are going 10mph over the speed limit, and can't safely stop in time.
Stop speeding, stop running yellow lights, stop bitching.
It's not so much about what you are able to do one day vs the next... it's when you get caught trying to steal third base, and are sent scrambling back to second, only to find out that it's already occupied. Thinking you're done, you head back to the couch, only to realize that first base is still open... and there you go, safe!
Either the hackers are also great bug fixers, or the game was more ready for prime-time then some of the crap that is marked "gold".
I wish someone would hack my computer, and fix all my bugs :(
She nag nowhere!
i.e. Fur ant abjurer
I hate fur and abjurers
Whoever marked this insightful... good job!
teehee
Not that you really have a choice, but which link in the Humancentipad do you want to be?
Regular users will see the regular increase (roughly the same as the integer increase).
But, anytime a chip releases a new feature that relies on specific code, of course only "certain kinds of apps" will get a boost.
Or maybe I'm misreading the summary (because, I don't read articles)
The mess that used both was using QT for EVERYTHING and Boost for EVERYTHING. It was amazing. Have you ever considered using both QT and Boosts signal/slot mechanisms? Did you know that both Boost and QT have shared pointer classes? Have you ever thought about using both? In the same class...
It was pretty good.
But hey, it made the company a LOT of money.
I've worked on projects that have used QT and ones that used Boost, and one giant mess that used both, and so I have to disagree on the hope that they adopt each other.
Both provide useful tools that don't need to be mixed up. Boost is (afaik) the leading edge for what the next C++ standard will contain. Boost does the crazy things, the good ones get polished and eventually become standard C++.
I love QT, but I can't imagine it becoming part of the C++ standard. So much overhead for things that you don't always need. (even by C++ standards).
A "short" story that sort of takes this is into account. (also, it was only published 23 years ago).
http://books.google.com/books?id=FLNCovxKl7IC&pg=PA160&lpg=PA160&dq=orson+scott+card+dogwalker&source=bl&ots=a2pcvnSmFx&sig=xIKvpnSdJ01xoxMt2SbkG7XKphM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OB8yUb-bCuLbyQHW24HAAQ&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=orson%20scott%20card%20dogwalker&f=false
I was unaware of the dancing pigs. I love that analogy.